Literature DB >> 23791305

Evaluation of localization errors for craniospinal axis irradiation delivery using volume modulated arc therapy and proposal of a technique to minimize such errors.

Pamela Myers1, Sotirios Stathakis, Panayiotis Mavroidis, Carlos Esquivel, Niko Papanikolaou.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To dosimetrically evaluate the effects of improper patient positioning in the junction area of a VMAT cranio-spinal axis irradiation technique consisting of one superior and one inferior arc and propose a solution to minimize these patient setup errors.
METHODS: Five (n=5) cranio-spinal axis irradiation patients were planned with 2 arcs: one superior and one inferior. In order to mimic patient setup errors, the plans were recalculated with the inferior isocenter shifted by: 1, 2, 5, and 10mm superiorly, and 1, 2, 5, and 10mm inferiorly. The plans were then compared with the corresponding original, non-shifted arc plans on the grounds of target metrics such as conformity number and homogeneity index, as well as several normal tissue dose descriptors. "Gradient-optimized" plans were then created for each patient in an effort to reduce dose discrepancies due to setup errors.
RESULTS: Percent differences were calculated in order to compare each of the eight shifted plans with the original non-shifted arc plan, which corresponds to the ideal patient setup. The conformity number was on average lower by 0.9%, 2.7%, 5.8%, and 9.1% for the 1, 2, 5, and 10mm inferiorly-shifted plans and 0.4%, 0.8%, 2.8%, and 6.0% for the respective superiorly-shifted plans. The homogeneity indices were, averaged among the five patients and they indicated less homogeneous dose distributions by 0.03%, 0.3%, 1.0%, and 2.8% for the inferior shifts and 0.2%, 1.2%, 6.3%, and 15.3% for the superior shifts. Overall, the mean doses to the organs at risk deviate by less than 2% for the 1, 2, and 5mm shifted plans. The 10mm shifted plans, however, showed average percent differences, over all studied organs, from the original plan of up to 5.6%. Using "gradient-optimized" plans, the average dose differences were reduced by 0.2%, 0.5%, 1.2%, and 2.1% for 1, 2, 5, and 10mm shifts, respectively compared to the originally optimized plans, and the maximum dose differences were reduced by 11.7%, 8.5%, 12.4%, and 13.9% on average for the 1, 2, 5, and 10mm shifted plans.
CONCLUSIONS: Setup errors related to isocenter shifting should be minimized in order to provide the patient with the most dosimetrically accurate treatment possible. Errors of 1-2mm can negatively affect the quality of the delivered treatment, most notably in the arc junction area, but the deterioration of the treatment plan accuracy is not as problematic as in the cases of larger errors such as 5-10mm. By employing a new planning technique, the dose differences due to setup errors can be greatly reduced.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Craniospinal axis irradiation; Setup errors; VMAT

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23791305     DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2013.05.026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  8 in total

1.  Reducing the dosimetric impact of positional errors in field junctions for craniospinal irradiation using VMAT.

Authors:  Andrej Strojnik; Ignasi Méndez; Primož Peterlin
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2016-03-28

2.  Robust Optimization for Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy Plans with Multi-Isocenter Large Fields.

Authors:  Li Liao; Gino J Lim; Yupeng Li; Juan Yu; Narayan Sahoo; Heng Li; Michael Gillin; X Ronald Zhu; Anita Mahajan; Steven J Frank; David R Grosshans; Quynh-Nhu Nguyen; Daniel Gomez; Xiaodong Zhang
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2016-12-30

Review 3.  Total Body Irradiation in Haematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Paediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia: Review of the Literature and Future Directions.

Authors:  Bianca A W Hoeben; Jeffrey Y C Wong; Lotte S Fog; Christoph Losert; Andrea R Filippi; Søren M Bentzen; Adriana Balduzzi; Lena Specht
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 3.418

4.  Modified volumetric modulated arc therapy technique with reduced planning and treatment time for craniospinal irradiation utilising two isocentres.

Authors:  Minh Nguyen; Thu Dang; Liz Deegan; Kelsie Henry; Scott Jones; Andrew Pullar; Robyn Cheuk; Adrian Gibbs; Lucy Sim; Catriona Hargrave
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2022-04-22

5.  A new strategy for craniospinal axis localization and adaptive dosimetric evaluation using cone beam CT.

Authors:  Kather Hussain Mohamathu Rafic; Christopher Sujith; Balakrishnan Rajesh; Ebenezer Suman Babu S; Peace Balasingh Timothy; B Selvamani; Paul B Ravindran
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2019-12-10

6.  Universal field matching in craniospinal irradiation by a background-dose gradient-optimized method.

Authors:  Erik Traneus; Nicola Bizzocchi; Francesco Fellin; Barbara Rombi; Paolo Farace
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-11-07       Impact factor: 2.102

7.  Impact of setup errors on multi-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy for craniospinal irradiation.

Authors:  Yongqiang Zhou; Yao Ai; Ce Han; Xiaomin Zheng; Jinling Yi; Congying Xie; Xiance Jin
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-10-18       Impact factor: 2.243

8.  End to end comparison of surface-guided imaging versus stereoscopic X-rays for the SRS treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocenter using 3D anthropomorphic gel phantoms.

Authors:  Victoria Bry; Daniel Saenz; Evangelos Pappas; Georgios Kalaitzakis; Nikos Papanikolaou; Karl Rasmussen
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 2.243

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.